Phoenix Development News (3)

[phoenixwillrise]

Originally Posted by Jjs5056

Because they prevent the Center from being redeveloped in a way that isn't inward-facing. The gardens were built because Phoenix lacked the iconic structures used by Rouse in other urban malls... I think the city has grown up to the point that it doesn't need an artificial focal point.

Granted, I've always tried to envision renovations in a way that maintained the gardens, so I won't be disappointed if they stay. I just hope priority is given to street-fronting retail vs. garden-facing.

In the unlikely case that a hotel is built, I suppose the semi-circular structure could house the bar, restaurant, event space, etc. that opened up to the gardens. Or maybe, large-scale retail could front the surrounding streets, with restaurant/bars leading into the center? Any other ideas? I'm just hoping for more than a coat of paint.

I know you mean well but I am getting tired about the rants about inward facing amenities, buildings etc. Phoenix is getting to be a big boy city every building doesn't need to be appealing to the street. I for one like the niches and tunnels and hidden alley shops, areas to eat, linger, meditate etc in a big city. Please get over the incessant need to have everything face out.

[Jjs5056]

Originally Posted by azliam

With the Novawest LLC Pin observation tower being essentially "dead" as of 2014, I'm wondering if there will ever be another proposal for an observation tower in Phoenix. I was scrolling through photos on google and came across this one proposed for Dubai that I thought was rather unique-looking (others may think it's ugly):

http://inhabitat.com/sustainable-spire-twisting-ivory-observation-tower-for-dubai/xten-lead01/

The thing that I liked about it was that it almost looked like a bird in flight (my partner says a whale's tail) and I believe one that somewhat resembled a Phoenix would look pretty neat, especially if lit up at night. I have to admit I was never a huge fan of the Pin only because I thought the roundness of it had been done too many times and it sometimes reminded me of a water tower. However, do you think a tower like the one proposed for Dubai would ever work here in Phoenix? If not, what would you propose?

With all of the talk about activating Adams and potentially demolishing the south convention center for a new arena, I thought it would be interesting if the brutalist Symphony Hall were demolished and replaced with the lost convention space, and the entrance at the end of Adams Street used for an iconic observation tower. Since Adams had been proposed to be used for events, tickets and gift shop could be on the 2nd floor above the CC lobby, with bridges extended out over the south side of the Hyatt and north side of the parking structure to be used to watch performances below, enter new retail built on either side, etc.

The Pin, to me, had no relation to Phoenix and its location was insignificant. At least this location is at the center of where Phoenix hosts guests from across the world, at the terminus of what it wants to turn into its most urban block. Some classy way of symbolizing a fire rising from the ashes as the elevator rose to the top would be cool.

Originally Posted by phoenixwillrise

I know you mean well but I am getting tired about the rants about inward facing amenities, buildings etc. Phoenix is getting to be a big boy city every building doesn't need to be appealing to the street. I for one like the niches and tunnels and hidden alley shops, areas to eat, linger, meditate etc in a big city. Please get over the incessant need to have everything face out.

You can feel that not every building needs to be appeal to the street, but your preference would go against the consenus on what creates a great city.

• LINK #1
• LINK #2
• LINK #3
• LINK #4
• LINK #5

Phoenix becoming a 'big boy city' is all the more reason to value good design, and take advantage of the opportunity to remedy past mistakes. Can you really compare the experience of any great street like Michigan Ave with having a coffee in the sunken Chase Plaza? The Arizona Center is surrounded by a 1,000 room hotel, pedestrian mall of the largest University in the country and its Nursing School, 8-story apartment complex, Biomedical Campus, and Herberger Theatre, none of which existed when it was originally built. The architect admitted that he had to artificially create a focal point, one which is no longer needed. Those eating at AZ Center can now look across 3rd Street and see conventioneers on their way to meetings, ASU students heading toward class in the new Law School, or get ready to pay their bill as the Herberger starts filling up. ASU students would have a reason to continue to the end of Taylor Mall with a new marquee and entrance into the AMC. That's what a city is... the interaction of different people doing different things. How are dead zones conducive to a city growing up?

The niches and alley shops you enjoy are likely in cities with busy enough streets that these spaces have now been (re)claimed in order to expand the urban footprint. No city has a bustling district of shopping alleys between empty streets with buildings that have no windows and loading docks, garage ramps, and dumpsters. Some of the alleys used in Roosevelt Row work because of this concept; the AZ Center does not, because it's admittedly a faux/forced experience. If you enjoy that experience, or enjoy it more than anything downtown has to offer on the surrounding blocks, that's fine. I like the idea of it, as well, and like those same hidden spaces in cities. There a few cool new ones in NYC I just noticed: all usually lined with double-sided retail. I just prefer that some of the flaws of AZ Center are fixed before preserving the gardens or a niche whose design has the consequence of killing the surrounding streets.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by Jjs5056

With all of the talk about activating Adams and potentially demolishing the south convention center for a new arena, I thought it would be interesting if the brutalist Symphony Hall were demolished and replaced with the lost convention space, and the entrance at the end of Adams Street used for an iconic observation tower. Since Adams had been proposed to be used for events, tickets and gift shop could be on the 2nd floor above the CC lobby, with bridges extended out over the south side of the Hyatt and north side of the parking structure to be used to watch performances below, enter new retail built on either side, etc.

The Pin, to me, had no relation to Phoenix and its location was insignificant. At least this location is at the center of where Phoenix hosts guests from across the world, at the terminus of what it wants to turn into its most urban block. Some classy way of symbolizing a fire rising from the ashes as the elevator rose to the top would be cool.



You can feel that not every building needs to be appeal to the street, but your preference would go against the consenus on what creates a great city.

• LINK #1
• LINK #2
• LINK #3
• LINK #4
• LINK #5

Phoenix becoming a 'big boy city' is all the more reason to value good design, and take advantage of the opportunity to remedy past mistakes. Can you really compare the experience of any great street like Michigan Ave with having a coffee in the sunken Chase Plaza? The Arizona Center is surrounded by a 1,000 room hotel, pedestrian mall of the largest University in the country and its Nursing School, 8-story apartment complex, Biomedical Campus, and Herberger Theatre, none of which existed when it was originally built. The architect admitted that he had to artificially create a focal point, one which is no longer needed. Those eating at AZ Center can now look across 3rd Street and see conventioneers on their way to meetings, ASU students heading toward class in the new Law School, or get ready to pay their bill as the Herberger starts filling up. ASU students would have a reason to continue to the end of Taylor Mall with a new marquee and entrance into the AMC. That's what a city is... the interaction of different people doing different things. How are dead zones conducive to a city growing up?

The niches and alley shops you enjoy are likely in cities with busy enough streets that these spaces have now been (re)claimed in order to expand the urban footprint. No city has a bustling district of shopping alleys between empty streets with buildings that have no windows and loading docks, garage ramps, and dumpsters. Some of the alleys used in Roosevelt Row work because of this concept; the AZ Center does not, because it's admittedly a faux/forced experience. If you enjoy that experience, or enjoy it more than anything downtown has to offer on the surrounding blocks, that's fine. I like the idea of it, as well, and like those same hidden spaces in cities. There a few cool new ones in NYC I just noticed: all usually lined with double-sided retail. I just prefer that some of the flaws of AZ Center are fixed before preserving the gardens or a niche whose design has the consequence of killing the surrounding streets.

Unfortunately you dont take into account that in the modern world where phoenix developed with cars and cheap land it made sense to develop the way it did.

And with modern communication tech mixed with modern transportation the "need" to have inward facing walk-able urban cores doesn't really exist. The only reason it does is preference.

The biggest issue I had with Urban Planning in college was that it assumed the moral right to force developers and companies to do whatever the planners wanted regardless of economic reality.

Not to mention the very same type of planners 50-60 years ago CREATED the "dreadful" Car oriented suburbs that they now rail against, yet they still presume to be blameless and know-it-alls with the current planning trends.

[biggus diggus]

I hate to break up the riveting argument above but has anyone else noticed all of the new apartment buildings are wood frame construction? Low construction quality will translate into future lower end products.

[combusean]

^ Which is what Phoenix will need when it matures into a more expensive city with expensive homes and expensive newer apartments. The original developer will have sold them off long ago.

When Phoenix is full of four and five story buildings like real dense cities, you'll see a lot more reason for it to go taller still. Its history of placing tower projects in suburbs or green fields has never been sustainable and is leading to the issues the city has with vacancies now.

[phoenixwillrise]

Originally Posted by Jjs5056

With all of the talk about activating Adams and potentially demolishing the south convention center for a new arena, I thought it would be interesting if the brutalist Symphony Hall were demolished and replaced with the lost convention space, and the entrance at the end of Adams Street used for an iconic observation tower. Since Adams had been proposed to be used for events, tickets and gift shop could be on the 2nd floor above the CC lobby, with bridges extended out over the south side of the Hyatt and north side of the parking structure to be used to watch performances below, enter new retail built on either side, etc.

The Pin, to me, had no relation to Phoenix and its location was insignificant. At least this location is at the center of where Phoenix hosts guests from across the world, at the terminus of what it wants to turn into its most urban block. Some classy way of symbolizing a fire rising from the ashes as the elevator rose to the top would be cool.



You can feel that not every building needs to be appeal to the street, but your preference would go against the consenus on what creates a great city.

• LINK #1
• LINK #2
• LINK #3
• LINK #4
• LINK #5

Phoenix becoming a 'big boy city' is all the more reason to value good design, and take advantage of the opportunity to remedy past mistakes. Can you really compare the experience of any great street like Michigan Ave with having a coffee in the sunken Chase Plaza? The Arizona Center is surrounded by a 1,000 room hotel, pedestrian mall of the largest University in the country and its Nursing School, 8-story apartment complex, Biomedical Campus, and Herberger Theatre, none of which existed when it was originally built. The architect admitted that he had to artificially create a focal point, one which is no longer needed. Those eating at AZ Center can now look across 3rd Street and see conventioneers on their way to meetings, ASU students heading toward class in the new Law School, or get ready to pay their bill as the Herberger starts filling up. ASU students would have a reason to continue to the end of Taylor Mall with a new marquee and entrance into the AMC. That's what a city is... the interaction of different people doing different things. How are dead zones conducive to a city growing up?

The niches and alley shops you enjoy are likely in cities with busy enough streets that these spaces have now been (re)claimed in order to expand the urban footprint. No city has a bustling district of shopping alleys between empty streets with buildings that have no windows and loading docks, garage ramps, and dumpsters. Some of the alleys used in Roosevelt Row work because of this concept; the AZ Center does not, because it's admittedly a faux/forced experience. If you enjoy that experience, or enjoy it more than anything downtown has to offer on the surrounding blocks, that's fine. I like the idea of it, as well, and like those same hidden spaces in cities. There a few cool new ones in NYC I just noticed: all usually lined with double-sided retail. I just prefer that so
me of the flaws of AZ Center are fixed before preserving the gardens or a niche whose design has the consequence of killing the surrounding streets.

Sorry nice points but I still don't agree leave the freaking garden alone!

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by combusean

^ Which is what Phoenix will need when it matures into a more expensive city with expensive homes and expensive newer apartments. The original developer will have sold them off long ago.

When Phoenix is full of four and five story buildings like real dense cities, you'll see a lot more reason for it to go taller still. Its history of placing tower projects in suburbs or green fields has never been sustainable and is leading to the issues the city has with vacancies now.

Exactly you cant go from dirt lots to high-rises while skipping the middle steps

[biggus diggus]

For the record I never made reference to the height or size of buildings, I'm talking about construction materials.

Wood frame buildings will be future eyesore and drag the neighborhood value down - at some point.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by biggus diggus

For the record I never made reference to the height or size of buildings, I'm talking about construction materials.

Wood frame buildings will be future eyesore and drag the neighborhood value down - at some point.

But they can also be more easily demolished and replaced with taller structures if future market conditions warrant.

[biggus diggus]

The reality is though if there are a lot of these structures in a small area it's more likely the area just becomes lower end. I've seen it happen many times in other cities, it's not a new idea I just came up with.

[combusean]

If they're made out of wood, who cares? If these structures become problematic where they're built Phoenix will have much more to worry about than the buildings themselves. If the neighborhood is good, they'll be rented out and maintained for a solid middle class housing stock. If the neighborhood is bad, they'll be deathtraps and slums. I would hope areas like 7th/16th/24th/44th St and Camelback and Midtown and Downtown wouldn't become places where buildings like these are left to rot and drag down property values.

FWIW, they're building 4 over 1 everywhere. LA, SF, almost any city has this default construction scheme for apartment buildings.

[biggus diggus]

Ok, I've never been to this rodeo before, you're right.

[KEVINphx]

Originally Posted by biggus diggus

Ok, I've never been to this rodeo before, you're right.

lol what a baby - don't be cry.

[biggus diggus]

Originally Posted by KEVINphx

lol what a baby - don't be cry.

I think you're misreading my post, no crying happening here, but what I've been saying will happen is fact, no need to argue with me.

[combusean]

You know, for as many ground floor units that are in the original 3rd St/Roosevelt project, it's not bad at all. Who knows what will become of those units over time--if it will become more beneficial to lease those out as commercial spaces that could add a lot of pizazz to Roosevelt.

biggus diggus, you haven't provided much of an argument or an alternative. You're saying these buildings will drag down property values--well, they're being built as almost big and dense as they practically can be in areas that shouldn't fall apart any time soon--these units are top of the line with all the amenities and certainly charge as much. When they start dragging down property values, they'll be razed and rebuilt much bigger if Phoenix becomes a real city or a vacant lot will be better like Detroit.

Density begets density. On 16th st, something like a square mile of population density is being built. When there's a number of these units and the nearby retail steps up, gentrifies, and fully realizes demand, you'll see the market want bigger and better structures than the still-massive things that are being planned (300 units is a *lot* of units, no matter what)

Presently, it's the lack of full time residents and population density is what's dragging the existing built environment down and why so many useless commercial buildings are being razed for these structures--not density where it's needed. I'd struggle to find one property owner that would be sitting in despair when nearby densities are 15,000 per square mile, and when you take projects like Crescent Highland into consideration, those are being built at 60 - 70,000 people per square mile--Manhattan like densities.

Nor do I know why woodframe is some evil--there are plenty of buildings in SF that are woodframe and new and rent for $3,500 a month for a one bedroom so construction type is immaterial as long as the local economy and neighborhood warrants it.

If you have some experiences to the contrary I'd rather you relate them directly than declare your word as gospel.

[biggus diggus]

I've bought, sold, run, and built apartment buildings for long enough to promise you that wood frame buildings do not age well and after time look cheap to potential tenants. The illusion that the apartments are cheap and run down does two things; prices get more competitive and a different type of person rents them and also newer and better buildings are built. In a city like phoenix there's enough land that most buildings will be built without tearing the older stuff down.

This is a long process, maybe longer than some of us will be around, but it does happen every time. The best example I can provide is the large number of buildings in the eastern part of downtown San Diego, the area has been in a low downward trend for a few years now.

This isn't about density or height, those things don't matter to me and height makes no sense with all the available land in Phoenix.

[Jjs5056]

Originally Posted by combusean

You know, for as many ground floor units that are in the original 3rd St/Roosevelt project, it's not bad at all. Who knows what will become of those units over time--if it will become more beneficial to lease those out as commercial spaces that could add a lot of pizazz to Roosevelt.

Eh; the # of units built at that time in that location was great. But, the design was really pretty weak. That garage should have been wrapped and the retail plan was as as basic as it could get - it should have wrapped around all of 4th Street to Garfield so the garage space wasn't so isolated.

Now that two good tenants have leased space and a 3rd tenant seems imminent, it's hard to complain compared to some of these apts in the pipeline. Obviously, they wouldn't have known that Proxy would be built next door with live/work space on both 4th St and McKinley, but had they made the 4th Street units live/work, that would've been contiguous space from Fillmore through Roosevelt. I'm glad more projects have live/work included- that seems like a good solution in an area filled with demand for affordable business space. On streets with a questionable market, you could let the owner choose its use and at least have infrastructure for commercial in the future.

The whole defense for many supporting the onslaught of 4-over-1 cheap construction was that it would bring density to downtown quickly and be easy to tear down later. For downtown to ever get to a point where it's replacing any of these projects... well, no. For an area like Roosevelt Row, building stock that shows its age and becomes more affordable really isn't that bad of a thing. A few more projects with the quality of Skyline/Portland on the Park would be great, but I'd say that they are being built where appropriate - near the park, closer to the CBD, etc.

Circles on Central, 300 units in 19 stories, is being designed by CCBG Architects. The permit specifies the tower and that a "portion" of the existing structure will be used for retail space. CCBG has done great adaptive reuse in the Warehouse District especially, so I'd like to have faith that this will be done tastefully, but I guess there really is no other logical point of demolition other than just after the rotunda window, which is more than 50% of the building. It'd be neat if at least the front half of the building were kept to keep the full context of the store's design.

[Jjs5056]

Speaking of cheap construction, is there a greater than 0% shot that the CityScape buildings on PSP will be torn down in our lifetime? Was there ever a definitive answer given about why the apartments were cut from the top? Some said it was air rights, but was that just an excuse for a poor market? If so, I wish they'd knock the L-shaped building down, split it open on the intersection of Jefferson, and add apartments to the top along with a better layout that provided retail on both sides, windows/balconies on the upper levels, etc. And, cut some of the massing so the 1st Ave and Jefferson sidewalks aren't death traps.

For now, I wish they'd at least do something with the upper level facade (add displays for each store?), the massive roof (urban garden?), and the 1st Ave/Washington corner: just trash the metal blob and clear out all of the planters. Its all totally unnecessary, kills circulation, and blocks views of the storefronts. I also wonder if the special deals RED offered tenants originally are no longer available? The 2nd floor of retail is already going down the AZ Center route - Charming Charlie's is now DPP offices, and NRG has the space with a small terrace overlooking 1st St. I don't see V's barbershop lasting much longer, either, up there; it's a cool concept, but would make much more sense on the ground floor next to a female equivalent (DryBar?).

It's too bad retail shops just don't seem to work downtown yet. Urban Outfitters is hardly an anchor these days; an Apple store in the DPP space would've definitely been a big deal for downtown, and while the CVS was nice in theory for bringing a pharmacy downtown, one closer to ASU would make more sense, and 13,000 square feet is a lot of space.

[PHXFlyer11]

Originally Posted by Jjs5056

Circles on Central, 300 units in 19 stories, is being designed by CCBG Architects. The permit specifies the tower and that a "portion" of the existing structure will be used for retail space. CCBG has done great adaptive reuse in the Warehouse District especially, so I'd like to have faith that this will be done tastefully, but I guess there really is no other logical point of demolition other than just after the rotunda window, which is more than 50% of the building. It'd be neat if at least the front half of the building were kept to keep the full context of the store's design.

I REALLY hope this happens, would be awesome and help fill the skyline between downtown and Portland on the Park.

The "microapartments" proposed next to Angel's Trumpet will also help in this.

Thought - It does not appear that the lot directly to the south of Proxy is owned by the Proxy owners not does it appear it's part of the project. It is a prime location for apartments, but the lot is rather small. I could see this developing into a 16-20 story apartment building in the future. It would really create a nice scale up from Roosevelt towards downtown.

[biggus diggus]

Desi and Ramsey own that whole strip on Pierce from 4th to 3rd (that's the one you're talking about, right?), there's three parcels. They're based in Toronto and who knows whether it will actually be developed or if they'll sell it off, with them it's always a crap shoot and they do very little outside of Ontario, I think one apartment complex in Orlando (?) and that's about it.

Don't hold your breath on that one any time soon, I think it's a land bank.